[I know this is a bit of an oldie but Sport has been busily defending it on CARM so...]
The evolution of fruits and vegetables
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would like to know how the story goes with the evolution of fruits and vegetables. With animals, evolutionists like to say that a worm, for instance, could turn into a centipede or millipede simply by the addition of some new legs. Humans happen to be chimps with larger brains and opposable thumbs. () So evolutionists like to look at different parts and try to figure out how they came about or how they got modified to lead from one creature to the next.
But what about fruits and vegetables? How would a plumb or a grape, for example, evolve into an orange or a grapefruit? You wouldn't be able to do that by changing out small parts -- an orange is pretty much an orange through and through. And what type of mutation would turn one type of fruit into another? I realize certain berries can be selectively manipulated to spin off new varieties. Same with tomatoes. But berries are still berries...and tomatoes are still tomatoes.
How would natural selection work with plants? How would a population of lemon trees (which obviously all came from lemon seeds), for example, grow trees that produced fruit that was not quite a lemon? Isn't a lemon a lemon? And wouldn't only lemons come from lemon trees?
37 comments
OMG everything is revealed and I see the light.
Once you start with simple berries, you can probably get most fruits. That's my conjecture, at least.
From lemons, you get a lemonparty. Seriously, Supersport*, look it up.
*If you're not supersport, look it up at your own risk. I warned you.
Well considering that most fruits and vegetables have been bred to be completely different from their wild ancestor, I don't see a problem with the question.
Ever seen a wild carrot? Wild plum? Wild cherry? They're not what you find in Safeway.
HOW CAN EVOLUTION WORK WHEN THINGS MAKE THE SAME THINGS!
Because... they change slightly. And adapt. Each thing is slightly different from the last.
YEAH BUT THEY ARE STILL THE SAME THINGS
No... THEY CHANGE!!
Watch an episode of Alton Brown, anything with his "Nutritional Anthropologist." I'm sure you'll find plenty of "your" kind of evidence for evolution... I mean, domestication for those of us with a brain cell or two.
It's ironic that SS, of all people, would try to take on plant evolution. To a rational person the evidence of plant evolution is far stronger than for animals. One advantage is that you can dissect living plant tissue without killing the plant. Then there are the countless examples of man made plants; from bananas to varietal wheat. Not to mention genetically engineered "designer plants".
Only someone as willfully ignorant as SS can deny that all those changes in plants are examples of selection. Though the parameters for the selection are decided by man, the mechanism is the same as natural selection.
Heck, botany is one of the oldest known sciences. Ancient Man may not have written textbooks about genetics, but, they sure as heck manipulated existing plants for desirable characteristics.
But, since SS is so committed to remaining oblivious to reason, there's no use telling him that.
BTW, if SS were shown the wild progenitor of a modern lemon, or banana, he would deduce they are "different kinds". Until he was informed that such examples of artificial selection prove the validity of natural selection.
Ever wonder if old Sport will get a bit side-tracked and one day go....: 'blah, blah, it would take millions of years and must happen between generations, over a long period of time and that's just...... Hold on, that would work! What have I been doing all this time?'
Sport often gets close, but willfully misunderstands at the critical point.
One day....
wow...I'd almost like to say that SS is a poe.
Firstly, tomatoes are berries. Secondly, chimps do have opposable thumbs.
To explain evolution as it pertains to plants (fruits, vegetables, and...others I guess...not sure how trees and such would be applied to food groups) you'd first need to understand the basics of evolution. You do not. So me tellng you that over time plants that produced fruit that animals liked to eat and as a result spread the seeds of flourished would be meaningless because you can't possibly grasp why that's important or why it would be beneficial for a plant to have animals spreading it's seeds about.
Also, I'd like to point out to you even though you won't read this and even if you did you wouldn't understand it, but worm + legs = millipede is addition, not evolution. Science isn't quite as simply as that Hasbro Cootie game you almost definitely spend hours a day playing while contenmplating how best to display your ignorance and general asshatedness online.
Do you really exist? Does your mind actually go there?
I think I have changed my position. I used to say I wanted fundies to use their brains more and actually think. But, if this is the result, please crawl back into your mental darkness.
Actually, if you want to see evolution in action, flowering plants are the best model system, because their simple developmental program and persistent embryonic tissue allow variation to remain in populations over time, even when thisvariation is not instantly adaptive. Reproductive isolation of an individual is not necessarily an evolutionary dead end becuase most flowering plants can either reproduce clonally or self-fertilize. Speciation over the course of a human life-time has been documented many times.
Regarding fruits and vegetables, Supersport, most of these are the results of selective breeding by humans; these experiments are demonstrative of how rapidly natural selection works. But you wouldn't know anything about that.
Of course, rather than speculating idly, Supersport, maybe you should open a book now and again. Some of the stupid you keep in your head might fall out.
Super, evolution doesn't work that way. Grapes don't turn into grapefruits. Among other things, because they're part of the plant, not the plant itself. Which is a descendant from some fossiles the scientists have discovered.
Word, tracer and Blackrose!
Tomatoes are in the family Solanaceae which also includes peppers, potatoes, and tobacco. I freaking love Solanaceae.
oranges=oranges
lemons=/= oranges
things that exist dont evolve into other things that already exist, because the conditions around them dont require them too. if this was so, we'd have one type of mutant fruit that had evolved to be like as many other fruit as it could all at the same time, rather than have evolved specifically over vast amounts of times to suit its own environment as best as possible. for the record, things changing into other things at random is called transformation, not evolution.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.